Cases

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL IV EL PUEBLO DE PUERTO Certiorari RICO procedente del Tribunal de Recurrido Primera Instancia, Sala

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John A. Barone, J.), entered August 5, 2008, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint. Neither of plaintiff’s experts, address defendants’ admittedly sufficient prima facie showing that plaintiff’s alleged

477 F.Supp.2d 419 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff v. Efren Irizarry COLON, Defendant. Criminal No. 05-258 (GAG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. March 12, 2007. Guillermo A. Gil-Bonar, Sonia I. Torres-Pabon, United States Attorney's Office, San Juan, PR, for Plaintiff. *420 Gary H. Montilla-Brogan,

OPINION AND ORDER AIDA M. DELGADO-COLÓN, Chief Judge. Presently before the court is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (“FDIC” or “plaintiff’) motion to dismiss Héctor Rafael Estrada-Colón; Digno Emérito Estrada-Rivera, his spouse Edith Delia Colón-Feliciano and their Conjugal Partnership; Emérito Estrada-Rivera-Isuzu de Puerto Rico, Inc.’s1 (“EER;” collective

*4 LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. We revisit in this case whether federal law forbids Puerto Rico from removing individuals from its active voter registry for the office of Resident Commissioner— the only federal elective position in Puerto Rico — based solely on their failure to vote in one general election. In 2012,

EN EL TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE PUERTO RICO Ángela Alvarado Colón Certiorari Peticionaria 2002 TSPR 91 v. 157 DPR ____ Luis Guillermo Alemañy Planell Recurrido Número del Caso: CC-2001-12 Fecha: 28/junio/2002 Tribunal de Circuito de Apelaciones: Circuito Regional I Juez Ponente:

HOWARD, Circuit Judge. On June 28, 2000, defendant-appellant Luis Colón Osorio was arrested after Puerto Rico police officers investigating a drug purchase by a passenger in Colon’s vehicle discovered that Colón was armed and carrying, inter alia, an explosive device. In due course, a jury convicted Colón of being a felon in possession of a firearm, see

TEXTO COMPLETO DE LA SENTENCIA La Sra. Angela Alvarado Colón presentó recurso de certiorari en solicitud de la revocación de la resolución del Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Sala Superior de San Juan, que denegó descubrimiento de prueba en cuanto a Insular Supplies, Inc., (Insular). La controversia surge en una demanda de liquidación de comunidad de bienes instada por la señora Alvarado contra el Sr. Luis Guillermo Alemañy. E

FEINBERG, Senior Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs Francisco Aviles Martinez (Aviles) and Miguel A. Flores-Colon (Flores) appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, Jaime Pieras, Jr., J., granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees Carmen M. Rivera Yasquez (Rivera) and Guillermo Jimenez Monroig (Jimenez) and dismissing plainti

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. We consider in this appeal criminal convictions relating to a real estate transaction in Puerto Rico in the 1980s. The defendant, Ramiro L. Colón-Muñoz, formerly President of Ponce Federal Bank, was convicted of misapplication of bank funds (five counts), bank fraud, making a false entry on a loan document, making a false statement on a loan application, frau

157 F.3d 9 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Carlos Ruben ACOSTA-COLON, Defendant, Appellant. No. 97-1170. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 6, 1998.Decided Oct. 5, 1998. Rachel Brill for appellant. Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior Litigation Counsel, wit

877 F.Supp. 771 (1994) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Luis COLON OSORIO, Defendant. Crim. No. 93-040 (JAF). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. September 30, 1994. *772 *773 Miguel Pereira, Asst. U.S. Atty., Guillermo Gil, U.S. Atty., San Juan, PR, for plaintiff. Luis

OPINION AND ORDER FUSTE, District Judge. Before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), in this case where a former National Guard technician claims his dismissal was violative of his rights under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (1994), 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994), and Puerto Rico law claims. I.

OPINION AND ORDER BESOSA, District Judge. Before the Court is a motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Jose Guillermo Rodriguez, Lorraine Bengoa-Toro, Osvaldo Rodriguez, and the Municipal Government of Mayagiiez. (Docket No. 39.) For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Alberto Ruben Irizarry-Robles (“Iri

409 F.Supp. 960 (1975) PUERTO RICO INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES, INC., Plaintiff, v. Guillermo COLON et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 75-1135. United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. December 10, 1975. *961 *962 Donald M. Hall, McConnell, Valdés, Kelley, Sifre, Griggs & Ruiz-Suria, San Juan, P

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL ESPECIAL EDUARDO CORA COLÓN Apelación procedente del Apelantes Tribunal de Primera Instancia, v. KLAN202301098 Sala Municipal de

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL XII JOSÉ COLÓN COTTO Y Apelación OTROS procedente del Tribunal de Primera Apelado Instancia, Sala V.

PER CURIAM: Guillermo Perez has appealed the district court’s judgment dismissing his habe-as petition for failure to state a claim. Perez contends that Section 212(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h), as amended (pertaining to eligibility for waiver of inadmissibility), is unconstitutional because it disting

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL XII DIEGO L. MARTÍN COLÓN Apelación procedente del Apelante Tribunal de Primera Instancia,

OPINION AND ORDER DELGADO-COLON, United States Magistrate Judge. Defendant, Moisés Rivera-Negrón (Rivera) moves to dismiss the information filed against him on the basis that 18 U.S.C. § 3401 is unconstitutional on its face as applied in this case (Docket No. 15). For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED. I. Background. On April 28, 2001, the defen